APR  5 IS2< 


550 

C13g  ■ CALVIN 

GEOLOGY  AND  REVELATION 


■■i 


' ^ 


qeology 


UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


The  person  charging  this  material  is  responsible  for  its 
renewal  or  return  to  the  library  on  or  before  the  due  date. 
The  minimum  fee  for  a lost  item  is  $125.00,  $300.00  for 
bound  journals. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books  are  reasons 
for  disciplinary  action  and  may  result  in  dismissal  from 
the  University.  Please  note:  self-stick  notes  may  result  in 
torn  pages  and  lift  some  inks. 

Renew  via  the  Telephone  Center  at  217-333-8400, 
846-262-1510  (toll-free)  orcirclib@uiuc.edu. 

Renew  online  by  choosing  the  My  Account  option  at: 

http://www.library.uiuc.edu/catalog/ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/geologyrevelatioOOcalv 


GEOLOGY  AND  REVELATION 


THE  PRINTER  TO  THE  READER 


Professor  Calvin’s  address,  as  presented  in  the  following  pages,  wa 
printed  for  members  and  students  of  the  Okoboji  Lakeside  Laborator 
of  the  State  University  of  Iowa,  in  an  edition  of  only  eight  hundred  an| 
twenty-five  copies,  for  private  circulation.  I 

A member  of  the  staff,  in  the  printing-house  wherein  the  work  wa 
struck  off,  encouraged  by  some  acquaintance  with  Doctor  Calvin,  solicite 
and  obtained  the  privilege  of  printing  a few  extra  copies  for  his  own  usi 
Twenty-five  copies,  on  this  special  paper,  constitute  the  additional  issm 
The  only  changes  from  the  original  edition  are  on  the  title  page  and  i 
the  adding  of  the  first  two  pages  and  cover.  The  printer,  without  takin 
counsel,  has  presumed  to  construct  anew  the  title  on  the  opposite  pag 
From  the  official  publication  of  the  Iowa  State  University  is  taken  Doct( 
Calvin’s  titles  and  his  rank  in  the  institution,  of  which  he  is  the  seni( 
professor  in  length  of  service;  and  from  the  “Iowa  Official  Register  ” h 
public  position  of  State  Geologist,  an  office  he  has  filled  through  yeai 
with  credit  and  honor  to  Iowa  and  to  himself.  That  he  is  crowned  i 
the  love  of  his  students  and  associates  and  in  the  regard  of  all  his  fellov 
citizens  has  been  shown  on  many  occasions. 

No  man  of  to-day  is  better  qualified  by  education,  environment,  ar 
temperament  to  speak  in  authority  upon  the  subject  of  this  address  ths 
Doctor  Calvin.  He  has  been  Professor  of  Geology  at  the  State  Universii 
for  thirty-five  years;  he  is  known  and  is  honored  in  science  the  wor; 
around ; his  personal  life  is  that  of  a worshiping  christian  devoted  to  tl 
faith  of  his  ancestors,  a faith  based  not  on  conformity  to  a creed,  a fail 
that  reaches  down  to  and  nourishes  the  springs  of  life;  and  that  bad{ 
of  high  honor,  the  bronze  button,  tells  that  to  him  liberty  is  more  than  lif 
His  earnest,  dispassionate  address  will  commend  itself  to  the  readc|[ 
The  scholarship,  the  sincerity,  the  reverence  of  the  speaker  permeate  ill 
every  thought.  J.  S.  | 

Iowa  City,  Iowa,  July,  1909.  j 


SAMUEL  CALVIN 


GE0I06Y  ANB  BEVELATION 


AN  ADDRESS 

BY 

SAMUEL  CALVIN,  LL.D.,  F.  G.  S.  A. 

PROFESSOR  AND  HEAD  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  OP  GEOLOGY 
IN  THE  STATE  UNIVERSITY  OP  IOWA 
STATE  GEOLOGIST  OF  IOWA 


DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE  MEMBERS  OF 
THE  OKOBOJI  LAKESIDE  LABORATORY 
ON  SUNDAY,  THE  FOURTH  DAY  OF  JULY 
ONE  THOUSAND  NINE  HUNDRED  NINE 


IOWA  CITY,  IOWA 
PRIVATELY  PRINTED 


1909 


A, 

i! 

h 

i 


.i 


o 

o 

. 

t; 

In 

IT 


6"^C) 

C \ "5  9. 


c/  !'■(/ 


GEOLOGY  AND  REVELATION 

It  is  with  many  misgivings  and  no  small  degree  of 
hesitation  that  your  speaker  approaches  the  subject  of  the 
relations  that  exist  between  Geology  and  Genesis,  between 
Science  and  what  has  been  assumed  to  be  Revelation.  For 
let  it  be  said  to  begin  with  that  he  makes  no  claim  to  either 
the  training  or  the  special  aptitude  which  should  qualify 
him  for  interpreting  the  teachings  of  the  Bible;  neither 
does  he  claim  the  right  to  stand  here  as  the  representative 
of  Science.  In  what  follows  an  attempt  will  be  made  to 
show  how  the  relations  of  material  science  to  supposed 
revelation  may  be  viewed  by  one  who  has  devoted  some 
years,  with  more  or  less  success,  to  the  study  of  the  facts 
and  doctrines  of  modern  Geology  and  Biologj".  And  so, 
to  plunge  at  once  into  the  midst  of  the  subject,  it  may  be 
conceded  that  the  teachings  of  both  of  these  sciences  have 
run  contrary  to  long  accepted  interpretations  of  portions 
of  the  Bible.  The  teachings  of  Geology,  in  particular, 
seemed  to  cast  discredit  on  some  of  the  plain,  unequivocal 
statements  of  scripture,  especially  on  the  first  and  second 
chapters  of  Genesis.  A very  natural  result  followed.  The 
adherents  of  literal  biblical  interpretation,  who  imagined 
that  the  foundations  of  religious  faith  were  about  to  be 
undermined,  and  the  advocates  of  science,  who  found  it 
impossible  to  deny  the  facts  of  Nature  or  interpret  them 
otherwise  than  as  they  did,  were  converted  into  two  oppos- 


o 


2 


Geology  and  Revelation 


ing  hosts  between  which  there  raged  for  years  a controversy 
remarkable  for  the  intellectual  vigor  as  well  as  for  the 
bitterness  with  which  it  was  carried  on.  This  controversy, 
which  has  erroneously  been  called  a “Controversy  between 
Science  and  Eeligion”,  has  been  in  a fact  a “Controversy 
between  Science  and  certain  Conceptions  and  Interpreta- 
tions  of  the  Bible’’. 

It  is  a matter  of  some  significance  that,  between  the  two 
opposing  hosts,  we  have  had  a small  army  of  Reconcilers 
who  have  busied  themselves  in  well  meant  efforts  to  patch 
up  a peace  between  the  combatants.  Among  these  recon- 
cilers have  been  many  conspicuous  for  their  lack  of  capac- 
ity  even  to  understand  the  subjects  of  contention,  and, 
like  other  uninformed  meddlers,  they  have  done  more  harm 
than  good.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  there  have  been 
illustrious  names,  not  a few,  beginning  with  Hugh  Miller 
and  Hitchcock  and  forming  a continuous  series  down  to 
those  who  have  given  us  the  latest  deliverances  on  the 
subject,  among  whom,  deserving  reverent  and  respectful 
mention,  are  two  who,  in  recent  years,  have  joined  the 
great  majority  on  the  other  shore,  Dana  and  Gladstone. 
Thus  it  is  that  intellectual  giants  have  had  their  say,  first 
on  one  side,  then  on  the  other,  and  again  in  that  middle 
ground  where  reconcilers  have  stood  and  so  earnestly 
labored.  Is  there  anything  more  to  be  said?  It  must  seem 
like  presumption  or  something  worse  to  bring  here  a theme 
so  worn,  a theme  that  has  been  so  thoroughly  and  ably 
discussed  from  every  possible  point  of  view,  a theme  prac- 
tically exhausted.  While,  therefore,  I cannot  hope  to  bring 
you  anything  new,  I may  venture  to  repeat  what  you 


Geology  and  Revelation 


3 


have  heard  before,  that  the  whole  controversy  has  arisen 
largely,  if  not  wholly,  from  misapprehension  of  the  pur- 
poses and  proper  fields  of  science  and  revelation;  that 
when  these  purposes  and  distinctive  fields  of  activities  are 
understood  and  everywhere  recognized,  there  will  be  no 
controversy,  and  the  reconcilers  will  be  remanded  to  the 
limbo  of  things  unnecessary. 

It  will  be  profitable  to  set  clearly  before  our  minds  the 
state  of  affairs  from  which  the  intellectual  world  has 
emerged,  or  is  happily  emerging.  The  sciences  of  Geology 
and  Biology  have  contributed  their  full  share  during  the 
last  three  quarters  of  a century  to  revolutionize  our  con- 
ceptions of  nature.  The  notions  that  were  very  generally 
entertained  a century  ago  respecting  the  age  and  origin  of 
our  planet  and  all  that  it  contains,  seemed  to  be  supported 
bj-  the  teachings  of  the  Bible;  indeed  they  were  based  on 
what  were  apparently  its  plain,  positive,  unequivocal, 
straightforward  statements;  and  any  disturbance  of  those 
notions  seemed  to  involve  the  very  authenticity  of  the  sa- 
cred Word.  Hence  arose  the  controversy  to  which  we  have 
alluded,  a controversy  not  quite  settled  even  now ; for  some 
remnant  of  the  tumultuous  intellectual  heavings  that  were 
generated  during  years  of  stormy  discussion  between  sci- 
ence and  theology  still  makes  itself  felt  with  sufficient  force 
to  produce  more  or  less  disquietude,  even  in  those  serene 
places  where  culture  and  intelligence  most  do  flourish.  In 
some  quarters  where  breadth  of  vision  is  not  an  overshad- 
owing characteristic,  a sort  of  mimic  storm  of  discussion  is 
yet  maintained  with  the  result  that  science,  and  especially 
geological  science,  is  still  viewed  by  many  with  profound 


4 


Geology  and  Revelation 


distrust.  While,  however,  there  are  these  occasional  out- 
bursts from  the  old  combatants,  like  the  small  gusts  that 
follow  a departing  storm,  it  is  gratifying  to  record  the 
fact  that  on  the  side  of  Theology,  at  least,  a spirit  of  fair- 
ness, of  compromise,  of  charity  and  conciliation  has,  for 
some  time,  been  manifest.  It  is  realized  that,  after  all, 
material  science  and  Theology  are  not  enemies  and  never 
have  been.  There  can  be  no  cause  for  contention  between 
them.  Both  are  earnestly  and  honestly  seeking  after  truth. 
Manifestly  their  aims  and  conquests  lie  in  different  direc- 
tions and  in  wholly  different  fields.  Therefore  it  is  that 
our  most  enlightened  biblical  scholars  now  receive  the 
conclusions  of  science  without  protest.  Men  who  in  the 
most  eminent  degree  combine  sincere  piety  with  profound 
learning  and  clear  vision  relative  to  the  aims  and  origin 
of  the  scriptures,  regard  the  progress  of  science  with  sim- 
ple, unshakable  faith  that  the  great  text  book  of  morals 
and  religion,  the  book  that  always  and  everywhere  has  led 
men  up  from  darkness  and  superstition  to  indescribable 
heights  of  intellectual  and  spiritual  privilege,  can  never, 
through  any  conceivable  possibility,  be  disturbed  by  state- 
ments respecting  the  facts  of  the  material  universe,  whether 
the  statements  be  true  or  false.  The  objects  of  science  and 
the  great  aim  and  purpose  of  the  Bible  being  clearly  under- 
stood, scientific  conclusions  are  even  welcomed  with  the 
confident  expectation  that,  instead  of  overthrowing  the 
authority  of  scripture,  they  will  afford  clearer  and  larger 
views  of  its  sublime  significance.  On  the  heights  whence 
men  get  broad  spiritual  and  intellectual  vision,  it  is  seen 
and  gratefully  admitted  that  religion  is  the  gainer  from 


Geology  and  Revelation 


5 


every  conquest  made  in  the  domain  of  science.  In  conse- 
quence of  the  truer  and  grander  conceptions  of  the  mate- 
rial universe  which  science  is  continually  unfolding,  God 
is  exalted,  man  is  ennobled,  human  reverence  and  human 
faith  are  deepened  and  intensified.  President  White  puts 
the  whole  case  clearly  and  forcibly  in  this  one  sentence: — 
^‘All  untrammelled  scientific  investigation,  no  matter  how 
dangerous  to  religion  some  of  its  stages  may  have  seemed 
for  the  time  to  be,  has  invariably  resulted  in  the  highest 
good  of  religion  and  of  science.’’ 

Astronomy  was  for  a long  time  regarded  with  special 
aversion  by  the  literal  interpreters  of  the  Bible,  but  the 
contest  between  Astronomy  and  Theology  has  long  been 
settled.  I refer  to  the  matter  merely  for  the  purpose  of 
indicating  at  this  point  the  only  terms  of  peace  on  which 
such  a controversy  can  ever  be  settled,  the  terms,  namely, 
which  Astronomers  secured  and  which  granted  to  them 
forever  the  right  to  have  their  own  way,  to  think  their  own 
thoughts,  to  pursue  any  line  of  investigation  that  falls 
appropriately  within  the  sphere  of  their  science  by  their 
own  methods,  and  to  hold  and  teach  unreservedly  their 
own  conclusions.  This  may  seem  to  be  a very  one-sided 
sort  of  a peace,  but  it  is  the  only  one  that  is  either  rational 
or  possible,  and  all  who  know  the  facts  will  admit  that 
Theology  gained  far  more  by  granting  these  terms  than 
Astronomy  gained  in  receiving  them.  Astronomers  abated 
naught  of  the  energy  with  which  they  pushed  their  investi- 
•gations,  nor  did  they  modify  their  teachings  in  any,  even 
the  slightest  particular;  but  reverent  students  of  the  Bible 
came  to  see  that  it  mattered  not  what  Astronomy  taught. 


6 


Geology  and  Revelation 


God  was  still  maker  and  ruler  of  his  universe,  and  man^s 
moral  and  religious  needs  and  obligations  remained  abso- 
lutely unchanged. 

Geology,  as  a science,  is  much  more  recent  than  Astron- 
omy. It  has  had  the  misfortune  to  run  counter  to  an  unusual 
number  of  biblical  statements  which  seemed  to  be  couched 
in  language  unmistakably  plain.  These  statements  formed 
the  very  warp  and  woof  of  popular  belief  relative  to  human 
origin,  human  duty,  human  obligation,  and  even  human 
destiny.  They  seemed  to  constitute  a necessary  part  of  the 
very  foundations  of  religious  practice  and  instruction.  For 
these  reasons  it  has  happened  that,  within  the  memory  of 
some  present,  Geology,  quite  as  much  as  any  other  science, 
has  had  to  bear  the  odious  charge  of  being  particularly 
subversive  of  the  Christian  faith.  It  is  not  necessary  to  go 
beyond  the  bounds  of  personal  knowledge  to  find  justifi- 
cation for  the  statement  that  the  relation  of  Geology  to  the 
Bible  is  still  regarded  by  some  very  excellent  people  as 
open  to  suspicion.  At  all  events,  the  terms  of  peace  be- 
tween Geology  and  Theology  are  not  as  completely  settled, 
or  at  least  are  not  as  well  understood,  as  in  the  case  of 
Astronomy. 

It  may  be  well  at  this  point  to  examine  the  reasons  for 
the  unfavorable  estimate  in  which  Geology  has  but  recently 
been  held  by  many  and  still  is  held  by  not  a few.  First 
then,  the  earliest  clear  perception  of  the  import  of  geologic 
phenomena  made  it  plain  that  the  popular  view  relative  to 
the  origin  and  age  of  the  world  was  wholly  untenable. 
People  believed  that  their  belief  was  founded  on  the  first 
chapter  of  Genesis,  and  hence,  in  their  judgment,  if  the 


Geology  and  Revelation 


7 


claims  of  Geology  were  admitted,  the  Bible  would  have  to 
be  rejected.  If  Geology  were  true,  from  their  point  of 
view  the  Bible  was  plainly  false.  If  geologic  notions  were 
to  become  established  in  the  minds  of  the  people,  the 
authority  of  the  Bible  would  be  overthrown,  and  that 
meant  the  overthrow  of  all  moral  and  religious  authority. 
Men  would  thus  be  left  to  struggle  through  a world  of  sin 
and  sorrow  without  light,  without  guidance  in  the  midst  of 
gloom  all-pervading,  without  comfort  in  times  of  trouble, 
without  a ray  of  hope  for  the  future.  Do  you  wonder  that, 
animated  by  such  notions,  beset  with  such  fears,  they  met 
the  seemingly  pernicious  doctrines  of  Geology  with  a storm 
of  indignant  protest  ? Do  you  wonder  that  they  used  every 
argument  and  every  other  means  possible  to  avert  threat- 
ened danger  to  a faith  that  had  been  of  so  much  value  to 
the  race  of  sin-burdened  men,  and  that  seemed  at  once 
necessary  to  the  maintenance  of  social  order  and  the  main- 
tenance of  human  dignity? 

The  chronology  of  Archbishop  Usher,  notwithstanding 
its  lack  of  foundation  in  verifiable  data,  had  met  with  gen- 
eral acceptance,  and  its  dates  being  printed  in  the  margins 
of  the  reference  bibles,  were  regarded  by  ninety-nine  out 
of  every  hundred  as  of  equal  authority  with  the  texts  to 
which  they  are  appended.  According  to  this  chronology, — 
and  this  with  many  persons  was  equivalent  to  saying  ac- 
cording to  the  plain  teachings  of  the  Bible  itself, — the 
earth  and  all  it  contains  were  brought  into  being  by  a sud- 
den creative  fiat  about  6,000  years  ago.  Geology,  on  the 
other  hand,  asserts  that  the  age  of  the  world  must  be 
measured  by  millions  and  millions  of  years.  The  biblical 


8 


Geology  and  Revelation 


account  seems  to  state  unequivocally  that  all  animals  and 
plants  were,  by  a few  creative  efforts,  introduced  prac- 
tically all  at  once,  at  least  within  the  space  of  three  or  four 
natural  days.  Geology  shows  conclusively  that  the  intro- 
duction of  animals  and  plants  has  been  a continuous  pro- 
cess, beginning  in  the  haze  and  obscurity  of  a bypast 
eternity,  and  extending  without  break  or  interruption  over 
all  the  long,  countless  ages  of  geologic  time.  The  literal 
reading  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  makes  it  seem  to 
assert  that  the  earliest  animals  preceded  man  by  some  forty- 
eight  hours  at  most;  Geology  demonstrates  the  existence 
of  animals  through  unnumbered  ages  before  any  creature 
resembling  man  had,  or  could  have  had,  a possible  exist- 
ence. Again,  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  literal 
reading  of  Genesis  makes  it  teach  that  ‘‘grass,  the  herb 
yielding  seed,  and  the  fruit  tree  yielding  fruit  after  his 
kind’^,  preceded  by  several  hours  the  introduction  of  even 
aquatic  animal  life.  Geology  shows  incontestably  that  the 
ancient  oceans  had  swarmed  with  animal  forms  in  bound- 
less profusion,  that  generation  after  generation,  and  even 
species  after  species,  had  lived,  culminated,  perished,  and 
by  the  slow  process  of  development  had  been  succeeded  by 
other  species  in  countless  swarms,  through  the  long  lapse 
of  millions  of  years,  before  grass,  or  herb  yielding  seed,  or 
fruit  tree  yielding  fruit,  had  any  place  anywhere  on  all  the 
round  habitable  globe.  Literal  reading  again  makes  Gene- 
sis teach  that  about  the  time  when  the  waters  brought 
forth  abundantly  the  “moving  creature  that  hath  life’’, 
and  while  as  yet  terrestrial  animals  were  not,  neither  cattle 
nor  creeping  thing  nor  beast  of  the  earth  after  his  kind. 


Geology  and  Revelation 


9 


every  winged  fowl  that  may  fly  above  the  earth  in  the  open 
Armament  of  heaven  was  ushered  into  being.  Geology 
contradicts  all  this  by  showing  the  presence  of  multitudes 
of  beasts  of  the  earth  and  of  things  that  creep,  long  before 
there  was  a winged  fowl  in  existence.  Furthermore,  the 
facts  of  Geology  are,  in  this  instance,  supported  by  the 
theoretical  deductions  of  Biology.  Biology  would  say  that 
such  an  order  as  that  given  in  Genesis  is  unthinkable,  for 
winged  fowl,  whether  the  term  mean  birds  or  bats  or  ptero- 
dactyls or  dragon  flies,  have  been  derived  by  special  modi- 
fication from  terrestrial  forms,  and  therefore,  of  necessity, 
presuppose  the  existence  of  unmodified  terrestrial  ances- 
tors. The  authorized  version  again  places  the  introduction 
of  ‘‘great  whales’’  prior  to  the  appearance  of  any  land 
animals.  Now  if  whales  are  really  meant,  or  if,  as  some 
have  professed  to  believe,  reference  is  here  made  to  the 
great  swimming  lizards  of  the  Mesozoic,  geologic  facts  and 
scriptural  interpretation  are  again  at  variance.  Land 
animals  were  numerous  and  widely  distributed  before 
either  whales  or  swimming  lizards  appeared.  Indeed,  these 
creatures,  like  birds,  are  modified  offspring  of  terrestrial 
predecessors,  and  so  Geology  and  Biology  would  unite  in 
denying  both  the  fact  and  the  possibility  of  ‘ ‘ great  whales  ’ ’ 
occupying  the  place  in  the  order  of  animal  succession 
ascribed  to  them  in  the  literal  rendering  and  acceptance 
of  the  proem  to  Genesis. 

Then  again,  it  happened  that  the  too  narrow  and  literal 
interpretation  of  the  Word  led  to  the  belief  that  physical 
suffering  and  physical  death  entered  the  world  in  conse- 
quence of  Adam’s  transgression.  Paul’s  utterances  in 


10 


Geology  and  Revelation 


Romans  5:12,  and  also  in  1 Cor.  15:21  and  22,  could  be 
interpreted  so  as  to  lend  support  to  such  a view.  Milton 
may  be  regarded  as  the  prophet  and  exponent  of  the 
popularly  accepted  interpretation  of  many  passages  of 
scripture,  these  among  the  rest;  and  so  for  information 
concerning  what  was  the  current  belief  on  many  topics 
among  the  men  of  his  generation  we  need  only  turn  to  that 
immortal  product  of  imaginative  genius.  Paradise  Lost. 
Here  we  find  the  poet  describing  Sin  and  Death  sitting 
within  the  gates  of  hell  immediately  after  the  return  of 
the  tempter  from  his  successful  visit  to  Eden;  sitting,  as 
he  says, 

‘‘In  eounterview  within  the  gates,  that  now 
Stood  open  wide,  belching  outrageous  flame 
Far  into  Chaos. 

Sin  addresses  Death  proposing  an  immediate  journey  to 
the  new-created  world  where  their  great  author,  Satan, 
had,  by  accomplishing  man’s  ruin,  provided  for  them  a 
happier  seat,  and  Death  makes  significant  answer: — 

“ ‘Go,  whither  fate  and  inclination  strong 
Leads  thee;  I shall  not  lag  behind,  nor  err 
The  way,  thou  leading;  such  a scent  I draw 
Of  carnage,  prey  innumerable,  and  taste 
The  savor  of  death  from  all  things  there  that  live.’ 

So  saying,  with  delight  he  snuffed  the  smell 
Of  mortal  change  on  earth.” 

In  other  passages  the  poet  expresses  the  same  thought 
that  physical  death  had  entered  the  world  through  Adam’s 
sin.  Our  own  parents  and  grandparents,  you  will  remem- 
ber, entertained  the  same  views.  It  was  also  believed  that 


Geology  and  Revelation 


11 


the  suffering  and  death  to  which  all  sentient  creatures  are 
now  subject  are  not  only  a direct  consequence  of  the 
original  transgression,  but  they  are  the  attestation  and 
confirmation  of  all  that  is  said  and  believed  concerning  the 
sinless  innocence  of  our  first  ancestors,  and  of  their  sub- 
sequent temptation  and  fall.  Imagine  then  the  general 
horror  when  Geology  apparently  laid  profane  hands  on 
one  of  the  fundamental  supports  of  the  doctrine  of  original 
sin.  For  if  Geology  teaches  anything  with  certainty,  it  is 
that  suffering  and  death  have  been  coextensive  with  life, 
and  were  as  much  a factor  in  animal  existence  for  millions 
of  years  before  there  was  an  Adam  to  sin  and  fall  as  they 
have  been  since.  Every  rocky  stratum  that  was  slowly 
piled  up  in  the  old  geologic  seas,  is  but  a great  cemetery 
in  which  the  remains  of  once  sentient  creatures,  in  un- 
counted numbers,  now  lie  entombed.  Go  where  we  will 
among  the  hardened  sediments  that  constitute  the  rocky 
framework  of  our  continents  and  we  find  everywhere 
graves.  Almost  every  particle  of  matter  of  which  these 
stony  cemeteries  are  made  up,  bears  evidence  of  having 
once  throbbed  with  life,  such  was  the  boundless  profusion 
in  which  organic  things  were  supported  in  the  ancient  seas. 
And  only  a minute  fraction  of  the  stupendous  history  of 
life  and  death  is  embraced  within  the  narrow  limits  of  the 
period  since  man  came  to  sin  and,  like  all  his  fellow  crea- 
tures of  all  geologic  time,  to  suffer  and  die.  Moreover,  the 
notion  of  the  ideal  innocence  with  which  the  whole  lower 
animal  creation,  prior  to  the  fall,  has  been  credited,  re- 
ceives a severe  shock  from  the  geologic  fact  that  among  the 
multitudes  of  creatures  that  swarmed  in  the  seas  or  strug- 


12 


Geology  and  Revelation 


gled  for  sustenance  on  the  land,  there  has  always  been  a 
large  proportion  of  carnivorous  species.  Predatory,  re- 
morseless, cruel  creatures  there  always  have  been  in  abun- 
dance; creatures  endowed  by  Nature  with  sharpened  tooth 
and  claw  or  other  similar  weapons,  bestowed  upon  them, 
shall  we  say,  for  the  very  purpose  of  inflicting  suffering 
on  their  fellows.  If  this  be  not  quite  true,  it  is  certain  at 
all  events  that  they  possessed  these  weapons  and  that  they 
used  them  daily  against  their  fellows  in  supplying  their 
own  needs,  and  in  cruel  disregard  of  the  suffering  that 
must  incidentally  and  necessarily  be  inflicted.  There  were, 
indeed, 

‘^Dragons  of  tlie  prime, 

That  tare  each  other  in  their  slime, 

and  with  as  little  remorse  tare  multitudes  of  innocent 
creatures  to  which  Nature  had  denied  powers  of  effectual 
resistance. 

These  are  some  of  the  counts  that  have  been  brought  by 
the  elder  school  of  biblical  interpreters  against  Geology, 
these  are  some  of  the  particulars  in  which  the  differences 
between  Genesis  and  Geology  seem  to  be  irreconcilable. 
We  might  easily  mention  a number  of  other  counts  in  the 
same  indictment.  For  example.  Geology  has  never  been 
considered  quite  orthodox  in  the  matter  of  a universal 
flood  during  the  period  of  human  occupation,  nor  is  it 
orthodox  either  in  respect  to  the  origin,  the  primal  con- 
dition, or  the  antiquity  of  man. 

The  history  of  organic  life  is  inseparably  bound  up  with 
the  geological  history  of  the  physical  world.  Looked  at 
from  one  point  of  view.  Geology  and  Biology  are  essen- 


Geology  and  Revelation 


13 


tially  the  same.  Now  Biology  has  for  one  of  its  great 
central  doctrines  the  derivation  of  species  of  animals  and 
plants  from  preexisting  species,  by  modifications  brought 
about  through  the  agency  of  natural  causes.  Moreover, 
these  causes  have  been  operating  through  all  the  eons  of 
geological  time  and  are  still  operating  with  as  much  energy 
and  elfect  as  ever.  How  far  these  views  run  contrary  to 
the  old  conceptions  of  what  is  taught  in  the  Bible  con- 
cerning the  origin  of  animal  and  plant  life,  it  were  need- 
less to  point  out.  Milton  again,  in  his  own  masterly  and 
matchless  way,  voices  the  popular  conception  of  his  time 
relative  to  what  the  Bible  actually  teaches  concerning  the 
origin  of  animal  life.  With  some  poetic  license,  but  in  a 
manner  that  did  no  violence  to  the  generally  accepted  inter- 
pretation of  what  followed  the  command,  “Let  the  earth 
bring  forth”,  expressed  in  Genesis  1:25,  Milton  gives  us 
one  of  the  most  sublime  and  most  graphic  of  pictures 
created  by  the  genius  of  man. 

^‘The  eartti  obeyed,  and  straight 
Opening  her  fertile  womb,  teemed  at  a birth 
Innumerous  living  creatures,  perfect  forms, 

Limbed  and  full  grown:  out  of  the  ground  up  rose,  ■ 

As  from  his  lair  the  wild  beast,  where  he  wons 
In  forest  wild,  in  thicket,  brake,  or  den; 

Among  the  trees  in  pairs  they  rose,  they  walked: 

The  cattle  in  the  fields  and  meadows  green: 

Those  rare  and  solitary,  these  in  flocks  • 

Pasturing  at  once,  and  in  broad  herds  upsprung.  ^ 

The  grassy  clods  now  calved;  now  half  appeared 

The  tawny  lion,  pawing  to  get  free 

His  hinder  parts,  then  springs,  as  broke  from  bonds. 

And  rampant  shakes  his  brinded  mane;  the  ounce,  ' 


14 


Geology  and  Revelation 


The  libbard^  and  the  tiger,  as  the  mole 
Eising,  the  crumbled  earth  above  them  threw 
In  hillocks:  the  swift  stag  from  under  ground 
Bore  up  his  branching  head:  scarce  from  his  mould 
Behemoth,  biggest  born  of  earth,  upheaved 
His  vastness.’’ 

And  so,  with  swift  and  masterly  strokes,  the  picture  is 
drawn,  leaving  us  in  no  doubt  as  to  what  men,  a few  gener- 
ations ago,  believed  to  be  taught,  by  the  authority  of  Divine 
revelation,  concerning  the  manner  in  which  the  highly 
specialized  modern  types  of  animal  life  came  into  being. 

From  the  stand  point  of  science  we  get  a view  of  a con- 
tinuous process,  under  definite  and  orderly  law,  extending 
over  all  the  countless  ages  of  a bygone  eternity;  from  the 
other  point  of  view,  it  was  only  a few  thousand  years  ago 
that  all  types  and  grades  of  animals  and  plants  sprang 
suddenly  and  miraculously  into  being  in  obedience  to  three 
or  four  creative  fiats  which  followed  each  other  at  intervals 
of  only  a few  hours ; and  then,  creation  being  complete,  the 
whole  process  ceased  forever.  Could  divergence  of  views 
be  more  radical  or  extreme  ? Small  wonder  is  it  that,  under 
such  circumstances,  there  should  have  been  some  clash  and 
conflict.  Some  of  the  members  of  this  audience  will  be  able 
to  recall  the  sentiments  of  extreme  opposition  with  which 
the  evolutionary  doctrines  of  Geology,  including  Biology, 
were  regarded,  and  the  grounds  on  which  science,  on  ac- 
count of  its  attitude  toward  evolution,  was  attacked  by 
sincere  and  honest  leaders  of  religious  thought.  The  air 
even  yet  echoes  the  thunderings  of  the  heavy  artillery  with 
which  the  positions  of  science  were  but  recently  and  vigor- 
ously assailed. 


Geology  and  Revelation 


15 


It  would  not  be  profitable  to  pursue  this  part  of  the 
subject  farther.  What  has  been  said  is  probably  sufficient 
to  illustrate  the  difficulties  that  the  reconcilers  set  them- 
selves to  overcome.  It  certainly  seems  that  the  more  critic- 
ally the  teachings  of  science  and  Genesis  are  compared, 
the  more  hopeless  grows  the  outlook  for  a satisfactory 
reconciliation  of  their  differences.  Nevertheless,  as  already 
said,  we  are  on  the  point  of  securing  terms  of  peace,  in 
fact  the  peace  is  even  now  practically  secured,  alike  satis- 
factory to  science  and  theology.  These  terms  are  such  as 
to  leave  even  Geology  and  its  intimate  associate,  Biology, 
in  full  enjoyment  of  the  same  unrestricted  liberty  which, 
in  an  earlier  stage  of  the  conflict,  was  accorded  to  Astron- 
omy. Science  is  not  infallible.  It  has  made  many  mis- 
takes and  it  will  make  many  more.  Its  errors,  however, 
like  all  other  errors,  have  neither  abiding  force  nor  vitality 
in  them.  They  can  work  no  injury  to  revelation,  and  the 
truth  certainly  will  not.  Scientific  errors  can  only  be 
rectified  by  students  of  science,  pursuing  scientific  methods, 
and  never  by  any  reading,  literal  or  otherwise,  of  sacred 
texts.  The  attacks  on  science  which  have  sought  to  accom- 
plish its  confusion  and  overthrow  by  hurling  texts  at  it, 
have  always  beOn  productive  of  mischief,  and  of  mischief 
only.  They  have  never  corrected  a single  error,  and  it 
requires  no  spirit  of  prophecy  to  say  that  they  never  will. 
The  most  earnest  and  sincere  of  biblical  students  now  see 
that  they  can  well  afford  to  let  science  alone.  They  can 
go  even  farther  and  bid  it  God  speed  in  full  assurance  that 
its  final  conclusions  in  the  future,  as  in  the  past,  will  result 
in  deepening  religious  faith,  while  detracting  nothing  from 


IG 


Geology  and  Revelation 


the  authority  of  the  sacred  Word.  And  all  this  is  coming 
about  wholly  independent  of  schemes  of  reconciliation 
whereby  the  texts  of  scripture  are  distorted  and  mangled 
to  make  their  literal  wording  seem  to  agree  with  the  con- 
clusions of  physical  science,  I think  enough  has  been  said 
to  show  that  no  such  scheme  of  reconciliation  is  possible. 
To  my  mind  any  attempt  to  reconcile  Geology  and  Genesis 
by  forcing  a parallelism  between  Mosaic  cosmogony  and 
geologic  history,  is,  in  the  present  state  of  affairs,  simply 
mischievous.  Substitute  geologic  periods  for  days  if  you 
will,  give  to  other  words  of  the  book  any  arbitrary  mean- 
ing that  your  ingenuity  can  devise,  and  after  you  have 
exhausted  all  your  inventive  genius  your  scheme  will,  of 
necessity,  end  in  dismal  failure.  On  any  assumption  that 
the  first  of  Genesis  is  intended  either  as  a literal  or  sym- 
bolic record  of  scientific  facts,  or  that  it  has  any  relation 
to,  or  connection  with,  scientific  facts,  the  Bible  and  geology 
are  absolutely  irreconcilable.  Then  if  we  could,  by  some 
happy  exercise  of  ingenuity,  construe  the  language  of  the 
first  chapter  of  the  book  so  as  to  bring  it  into  harmony 
with  the  order  of  events  shown  in  the  geologic  record,  what 
should  we  do  with  the  second  chapter?  One  order  of 
creation  is  given  in  the  first,  a wholly  different  order  is 
given  in  the  second,  the  order  in  either  case  being  hopelessly 
at  variance  with  the  ascertained  facts  of  science.  Nothing, 
I think,  could  better  illustrate  the  entire  absence  of  any 
intention  to  treat  physical  phenomena  with  scientific  ac- 
curacy than  the  different  accounts  of  creation  in  the  two 
chapters  mentioned.  There  they  stand,  side  by  side,  at  the 
very  beginning  of  the  book,  to  serve  emphatic  notice  upon 


Geology  and  Revelation 


17 


all  who  will  but  take  warning,  that  teaching  the  truths  of 
material  science  is  wholly  foreign  to  the  purpose  of  the 
Bible. 

Fifty  years  ago  schemes  of  reconciliation  between  Genesis 
and  Geology  were  popular,  and  at  that  time  they  probably 
rendered  excellent  service  alike  to  science  and  religion. 
Modern  biblical  criticism  was  then  unknown,  and  the  hard, 
dry,  literal  rendering  of  scriptural  texts  was  the  common 
practice.  Geology,  a science  that  had  over  and  over  again 
been  rendered  abhorrent  in  popular  esteem  by  its  persistent 
contradiction  of  what  was  assumed  to  be  revealed  truth, 
had  been  rendered  still  more  odious  by  the  use  made  of  it 
by  the  aggressive  enemies  of  religion.  These  enemies  have 
ever  been  on  the  alert  to  get  possession  of  any  and  all 
weapons  that  gave  promise  of  enabling  them  to  batter  down 
the  defenses  of  religious  truth.  And  so  when,  early  in  the 
last  century,  the  theologians  declared  that  if  Geology  were 
proved  true,  the  authority  of  the  Bible  would  be  over- 
thrown, the  atheists  with  one  accord  became  champions 
of  Geology,  hoping  to  see  the  new  science  established  and 
the  fears  and  predictions  of  the  theologians  verified.  This 
they  did,  not  because  they  loved  Geology  or  knew  anything 
about  it,  or  cared  anything  about  it,  but  because,  taking 
the  theologians  at  their  word,  they  expected  this  science  to 
become  a serviceable  weapon  which  would  help  them  to  win 
against  their  adversaries.  It  has  been  the  same  with  evolu- 
tion, it  has  been  the  same  with  every  other  phase  of  science ; 
the  theologian  has  expressed  his  fears  and  uttered  his  dis- 
mal predictions,  and  the  atheist  has  straightway  rushed  to 
the  ill-advised  defence  of  science,  prompted  only  by  the 


18 


Geology  and  Revelation 


hope  that  the  predictions  of  the  theologian  would  be  ful- 
filled. And  so  when  the  enemies  of  religion  were  bringing 
odium  upon  the  new  science  of  Geology  by  using  it  as  a 
battering  ram  against  the  strongholds  of  biblical  truth,  the 
world  probably  needed  a Hitchcock  and  a Hugh  Miller  to 
propose  methods  of  harmonizing  scripture  with  the  geologic 
record.  It  was  of  more  importance,  however,  that  the 
Hitchcocks  and  the  Hugh  Millers  could  demonstrate  in 
their  own  lives  that  the  foremost  of  geologists  could  still 
be  simple  and  consistent  Christians. 

As  Geology  grew,  schemes  of  reconciliation  needed  con- 
stant readjustment.  An  arrangement  that  seemed  to  make 
a fairly  satisfactory  sort  of  harmony  one  day,  was  alto- 
gether out  of  harmony  the  next ; and  so,  though  the  earlier 
reconcilers  rendered  valuable  service  to  both  science  and 
religion,  there  came  a time  when  efforts  at  reconciliation 
were  harmful  rather  than  helpful.  The  latest  notable  at- 
tempt to  bring  Geology  and  the  literal  record  of  Genesis 
into  harmony,  that  made  by  Gladstone  some  years  ago,  is 
doubtless  fresh  in  the  minds  of  some  present.  The  swift 
defeat  which  the  eminent  reconciler  met  at  the  hands  of 
Professor  Huxley,  ought  effectually  to  discourage  further 
efforts  in  this  direction. 

What  then  is  the  attitude  of  the  Christian  geologist  to 
the  Bible  ? Simply  the  attitude  of  Galileo  and  of  all  scien- 
tists since  his  time,  that  the  Bible  is  not  a text  book  of 
science.  While  referring  frequently  to  natural  phenomena, 
it  refers  to  such  phenomena  as  they  were  seen  and  under- 
stood by  the  common  people  of  the  age  in  which  it  was 
written,  as  they  are  seen  and  understood  by  a very  large 


Geology  and  Revelation 


19 


proportion  of  the  population  of  the  world  to-day,  and 
wholly  without  regard  to  scientific  accuracy.  Its  science, 
therefore,  so  far  as  it  has  any,  is  the  science  of  the  times 
of  its  several  writers.  I think,  however,  it  might  easily  be 
shown  that  many  of  the  texts  which  were  quoted  with  the 
expectation  of  bringing  confusion  on  science  and  convicting 
it  of  ignorance  and  infidelity,  were  never  intended  to  have 
literal  reference  to  material  phenomena  at  all.  They  occur 
in  lofty,  imaginative,  poetic  passages  and  have  no  more 
relation  to  science  than  have  the  poems  of  Tennyson  or 
Longfellow.  Is  science  to  be  stigmatized  as  atheistical  be- 
cause its  actual  discoveries  do  not  accord  in  every  particular 
with  such  poetic  imagery?  On  the  other  hand,  shall  the 
Bible  be  rejected  and  thrown  aside  as  a collection  of  old 
wives’  fables  because  its  splendid  metaphors  are  not  cast 
in  the  precise  language  in  which  science  expresses  its  latest 
generalizations  ? Take  any  passage  at  random  from  Tenny- 
son’s  ^‘In  Memoriam”,  this  for  example: — 

‘‘I  falter  where  I firmly  trod, 

And,  falling  with  my  weight  of  cares 
Upon  the  great  world’s  altar  stairs 

That  slope  through  darkness  up  to  God. 

I stretch  lame  hands  of  faith  and  grope 
And  gather  dust  and  chaff.” 

Now  let  US  bring  science  to  the  test  of  these  poetic  ex- 
pressions and  tell  me  with  what  justice  it  is  to  be  con- 
demned if  its  conclusions  should  cast  doubt  upon  the 
material  reality  of  a great  world’s  altar  stairs  literally 
sloping  through  darkness  up  to  God.  Is  its  offense  magni- 
fied when  it  is  unable  to  describe  minutely  the  particular 


20 


Geology  and  Revelation 


kind  of  material  dust  and  chaff  that  can  be  grasped  by 
lame  hands  of  faith?  And  would  it  be  worse  still  if  it 
should  declare  itself  unable  to  conceive  of  lame  hands  of 
faith  as  material  realities  at  all?  On  the  other  hand,  will 
science  reject  Tennyson  as  utterly  absurd  and  unworthy  of 
regard  by  mature  minds  because  it  is  unable  to  apply  its 
measuring  rod  to  the  altar  stairs,  to  use  its  scalpel  on  the 
hands  of  faith,  or  tumble  the  dust  and  chaff  referred  to 
into  its  balance  or  half  bushel!  What  nonsense  it  would 
be  for  some  great  souled  idealist  to  insist  on  setting  up 
Tennyson’s  words  as  a test  of  accuracy  for  any  scientific 
conclusion  1 What  worse  than  nonsense  if  some  small  mind- 
ed scientist  should  insist  that  the  true  test  of  the  quality 
of  Tennyson’s  work  is  to  be  found  in  a critical  comparison 
of  his  expressions  with  the  demonstrated  facts  of  material 
science!  Tennyson,  in  the  passage  quoted,  is  not  guilty  of 
writing  nonsense,  but  on  the  contrary  expresses  forcibly 
and  with  the  utmost  fidelity  to  truth,  though  in  terms  of 
poetic  imagery,  an  experience  common  probably  to  every 
human  soul.  He  describes  a real  verity — if  you  will  par- 
don the  seeming  tautology — and  enlightened  science  is 
ready  to  acknowledge,  with  uncovered  head  and  bending 
reverence,  the  existence  of  verities  lying  entirely  outside 
the  domain  of  physical  phenomena. 

Science  and  the  most  reverent  biblical  criticism  may  now 
harmonize  all  apparent  causes  of  controversy  by  recogniz- 
ing the  obvious  fact  that  the  Bible  nowhere  assumes  to 
teach  science.  To  my  mind  it  has  no  more  to  say  on  the 
subject  of  Geology  than  on  navigation,  mining  engineering 
or  the  recent  applications  of  electricity.  With  as  much 


Geology  and  Revelation 


21 


propriety  we  might  search  its  pages  for  a correct  solution 
of  the  solar  parallax  as  for  a solution  of  any  of  the  vexed 
problems  of  Geology  or  Biology.  A quotation  from  a work 
on  Genesis  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Dods,  a quotation  which  I copy 
from  Professor  Henry  Drummond,  may  be  offered  here  in 
support  of  the  assertion  that,  among  the  most  eminent 
biblical  scholars,  the  assumption  that  the  first  chapters  of 
Genesis  contain  a literal  record  of  historic  facts  is  no 
longer  entertained.  I am  aware  that  some  of  the  positions 
of  Dr.  Dods  created  more  or  less  disturbance  among  his 
clerical  brethren,  but  the  fact  of  his  later  election  to  a 
professorship  of  Theology  implies  that  among  the  leaders 
of  what  was  but  recently  the  Free  Church  of  Scotland,  his 
views  relating  to  science  and  the  Bible  were  not  regarded 
as  seriously  objectionable.  Dr.  Dods,  writing  of  Genesis, 
says: — ^‘The  narrative  is  not  careful  to  follow  the  actual 
order  in  which  life  appeared;  it  affirms,  e.  g.,  that  fruit 
trees  existed  before  the  sun  was  made;  science  can  tell  us 
of  no  such  vegetation.  It  tells  us  that  birds  were  created 
on  the  fifth  day,  the  reptiles  on  the  sixth.  Nature  herself 
tells  a different  tale  and  assures  us  that  creeping  things 
appeared  before  the  flying  fowl.  But  the  most  convincing 
proof  of  the  regardlessness  of  scientific  accuracy  shown  by 
this  writer  is  found  in  the  fact  that  in  the  second  chapter 
he  gives  a different  account  from  that  which  he  has  given 
in  the  first,  and  an  account  irreconcilable  with  physical 
facts.  * * * * He  represents  the  creation  of  man  as 

preceding  the  creation  of  the  lower  animals — an  order 
which  both  the  first  chapter  and  physical  science  assure  us 
was  not  the  actual  order  observed.  * * * * it  seems 


22 


Geology  and  Revelation 


to  me,  therefore,  a mistaken  and  dangerous  attempt  which 
is  often  made  to  reconcile  the  account  of  physical  facts 
given  here  with  that  given  in  Nature  herself.  These  ac- 
counts disagree  in  the  date  or  distance  from  the  present 
time  to  which  the  work  of  creation  is  assigned,  in  the 
length  of  time  which  the  preparation  of  the  world  for  man 
is  said  to  have  occupied,  and  in  the  order  in  which  life  is 
introduced  into  the  world.’’ 

Let  me  quote  again,  this  time  from  Professor  Drum- 
mond;— “ There  is  a ‘ science  of  theology ’.  * * * It  has 
exponents  in  Britain  and  Germany  as  well  equipped  in 
learning,  in  sobriety,  in  balance  of  mind,  and  in  the  pos- 
session of  the  scientific  spirit,  as  the  best  of  the  interpre- 
ters of  Nature.  * * * To  theological  science  the  whole 
underlying  theory  of  the  reconcilers  is  as  exploded  as 
Bathybius.  » * * Scientific  theology  no  more  pledges 

itself  to-day  to  the  interpretations  of  the  Bible  of  a thou- 
sand years  ago  than  does  science  to  the  interpretations  of 
Nature  in  the  time  of  Pythagoras.  Nature  is  the  same  to- 
day as  in  the  time  of  Pythagoras,  and  the  Bible  is  the 
same  to-day  as  a thousand  years  ago.  But  the  Pythagorean 
interpretation  of  Nature  is  no  more  impossible  to  the  mod- 
ern mind  than  are  many  ancient  interpretations — those  of 
Genesis  among  others — to  the  scientific  theologian.” 

Another  British  writer  on  Genesis  defines  the  position 
of  modern  theology  in  these  clear  terms: — “There  is  a 
principle  frequently  insisted  on,  scarcely  denied  by  any, 
yet  recognized  with  sufficient  clearness  by  few  of  the  advo- 
cates of  revelation,  which,  if  fully  and  practically  recog- 
nized, would  have  saved  themselves  much  perplexity  and 


Geology  and  Revelation 


23 


vexation,  and  the  cause  they  have  at  heart  the  disgrace 
with  which  it  has  been  covered  by  the  futile  attempts  that 
have  been  made,  through  provisional  and  shifting  inter- 
pretations, to  reconcile  the  Mosaic  Genesis  with  the  rapidly 
advancing  strides  of  physical  science.  The  principle  re- 
ferred to  is  this:  matters  which  are  discernible  by  human 
reason,  and  the  means  of  investigation  which  God  has  put 
within  the  reach  of  man’s  faculties,  are  not  the  proper 
subjects  of  Divine  revelation;  and  matters  which  do  not 
concern  morals,  or  bear  on  man’s  spiritual  relations  toward 
God,  are  not  within  the  province  of  revealed  religion.  ’ ’ 
There  then  is  the  safe  position,  the  position  to  which  we 
all  must  come.  What  man  may  discover  by  the  exercise 
of  his  own  faculties  has  not  been  revealed.  Problems  of 
physical  science,  which  in  no  way  concern  morals  or  man’s 
spiritual  relations  to  God,  have  no  necessary  place  in  the 
sacred  Word.  The  one  lesson  to  be  learned  from  the  poetic 
story  of  creation  as  given  in  Genesis,  is  the  Divine  agency 
in  and  through  it  all,  and  it  is  a matter  of  indifference  as 
to  the  order,  the  time,  or  the  manner  in  which  the  various 
creative  acts  took  place.  Had  the  order,  time  and  manner 
of  creation  been  given  with  the  utmost  accuracy  of  scien- 
tific detail,  they  would  not  have  been  understood  by  a single 
individual  for  thousands  of  years.  Indeed  the  time  may 
never  come  when  such  a scientific  narrative  could  have  any 
significance  to  the  majority  of  human  kind.  Furthermore, 
such  a narrative,  however  full  and  accurate  in  scientific 
detail,  could  never  affect  for  weal  or  woe  a single  human 
soul.  It  is  not  a fundamental  necessity  to  man’s  spiritual 
welfare  that  he  should  be  able  to  gauge  the  heavens  or 


24 


Geology  and  Revelation 


know  how  to  compute  the  weight  of  the  earth,  but  it  is 
important  that  he  should  start  from  the  premise  that  ^‘In 
the  beginning  God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth.” 
The  bygone  eternity  involved  in  the  long  reaches  of  geologic 
time  may,  or  may  not,  fall  within  the  scope  of  man’s  intel- 
lectual attainments,  knowledge  of  that  kind  is  wholly  im- 
material from  the  standpoint  of  the  purpose  for  which  the 
Bible  was  written,  but  ignorance  of  the  fact  that  he  is  born 
heir  to  an  eternity  which  embraces  all  the  future,  would  be' 
attended  with  serious  consequences  to  his  spiritual  inter- 
ests. He  need  not  know  that  those  curious  organic  remains 
in  the  Harding  quarry  near  Canon  City,  Colorado,  indi- 
cate the  presence  of  primitive  fishes  as  early  as  the  Ordo- 
vician; it  is  immaterial  whether  or  not  scorpions  were 
introduced  as  early  as  the  Silurian;  his  hopes  of  eternity 
are  in  no  way  affected  by  ignorance  of  the  fact  that  no 
workable  coal  seams  were  formed  before  the  Carboniferous ; 
but  he  should  know  definitely  and  positively  that  ‘^When 
the  fulness  of  the  time  was  come,  God  sent  forth  his  son, 
^ * that  we  might  receive  the  adoption  of  sons.”  It  was 

not  necessary  to  reveal  the  technical  distinctions  between 
true  fowls  that  fly  in  the  open  firmament  of  heaven,  and 
bats  or  pterodactyls ; but  the  distinctions  between  right  and 
wrong,  between  virtue  and  vice,  between  the  broad  minded 
charity  which  leads  you  to  regard  your  neighbor  as  your- 
self and  narrow  selfishness,  between  holiness  and  unright- 
eousness, between  purity  and  moral  uncleanness,  are  all 
of  fundamental  importance.  On  these  points,  and  on  all 
others  which  concern  religious  and  spiritual  well  being,  the 
Bible  happily  leaves  us  in  no  uncertainty.  But  on  this 


Geology  and  Revelation 


25 


part  of  the  subject  it  would  be  unpardonable  presumption 
for  me  to  speak.  Its  full  elaboration  and  discussion  may 
well  be  left  to  men  who,  by  special  study  and  insight  into 
the  meaning  and  purpose  of  the  sacred  Word,  have  ac- 
quired the  right  to  speak  with  some  degree  of  authority. 

I venture,  however,  to  trespass  far  enough  to  call  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  the  religion  of  the  Bible  is  the  only 
religion  that  recognizes  man’s  true  relation  to  other  created 
things.  That  man  is  the  latest  and  the  crowning  effort  of 
creation  is  one  thing  at  least  in  which  Geology  and  the  first 
of  Genesis  agree.  Unenlightened  man  is  now,  and  always 
has  been,  disposed  to  exalt  created  things  as  objects  of 
worship.  There  are,  as  you  know,  sacred  crocodiles  and 
sacred  beetles  and  sacred  cats  and  sacred  monkeys.  The 
sun,  moon  and  stars  are  worshipped.  Lacking  anything 
better,  a block  of  wood  fantastically  carved,  daubed  with 
gay  colors  or  tricked  out  in  fantastic  garments,  will  answer, 
as  Carlyle  says,  as  a Mumbo  Jumbo  ‘‘which  he  can  thence- 
forth pray  to  with  upturned,  awe-struck  eye,  not  without 
hope.”  The  Bible  lifts  man  out  of  such  degrading  wor- 
ship, assures  him  of  his  own  exalted  position  at  the  head 
of  the  material  creation,  and  points  him  to  the  one  spiritual 
maker  and  ruler  and  all-provident  Father  of  the  Universe. 
Read  the  ecstatic  outburst  in  the  eighth  Psalm:  “When  I 
consider  thy  heavens,  the  work  of  thy  fingers,  the  moon  and 
the  stars,  which  thou  hast  ordained ; what  is  man,  that  thou 
art  mindful  of  him?  or  the  son  of  man,  that  thou  visitest 
him?  For  thou  hast  made  him  a little  lower  than  the 
angels,  and  hast  crowned  him  with  glory  and  honor.  Thou 
madest  him  to  have  dominion  over  the  works  of  thy  hands ; 


26 


Geology  and  Revelation 


thou  hast  put  all  things  under  his  feet:  all  sheep  and 
oxen,  yea,  and  the  beasts  of  the  field;  the  fowl  of  the  air, 
and  the  fish  of  the  sea,  and  whatsoever  passeth  through 
the  paths  of  the  seas.”  Now  compare  this  view  of  the 
dignity  of  man  and  his  relation  to  the  universe  with  the 
religions  which  not  only  sanction,  but  enforce,  the  pamper- 
ing of  sacred  beasts  of  various  kinds,  even  at  the  expense 
of  precious  human  lives.  None  of  the  beasts  of  the  field, 
nor  the  fowls  of  the  air,  nor  creatures  that  pass  through 
the  paths  of  the  seas,  are  worthy  of  human  worship,  for 
man  is  infinitely  exalted  above  them  all.  The  starry  heav- 
ens have  excited  awe  in  the  minds  of  earth’s  noblest  and 
most  gifted  men,  as  well  as  in  the  minds  of  nature’s  un- 
taught children  everywhere;  but  even  the  moon  and  the 
stars,  with  all  their  nightly  effulgence  and  beauty  and  in- 
comprehensible mystery,  are  undeserving  of  human  adora- 
tion. Thou  hast  ordained  them.  They  are  but  created, 
material  things  after  all,  and  man  outranks  moon  and  stars. 
Neither  are  the  angels  worthy,  for  they  too  are  created, 
and  man  is  made  only  a little  lower  than  they.  Thus  it  is 
that  the  Bible  everywhere  assigns  to  man  his  true  place  in 
nature  and  points  his  adoring  eyes  away  beyond  nature 
and  away  beyond  all  created  things  to  the  one  living  and 
true  God,  the  Creator  and  Father  of  all. 

On  all  hands  it  must  be  conceded  that  the  Bible  has  a 
grand  purpose,  and  I think  it  will  also  be  conceded  that 
that  purpose  is  not  to  teach  science.  To  my  mind  one  of  the 
strong  arguments  in  favor  of  the  divine  authorship  of  the 
book,  is  the  fact  that  it  has  been  able  to  outlive  all  the 
humiliation  and  reproach  that  have  been  brought  upon  the 


Geology  and  Revelation 


27 


cause  it  represents  through  the  false  claims  made  in  its 
behalf  by  over-zealous  and  unwise  friends.  The  truths  it 
teaches  are  the  necessary,  but  otherwise  undiscoverable 
truths  respecting  the  relations  of  man  to  nature,  of  man  to 
man,  and  of  man  to  God.  You  may  rest  assured  of  two 
things.  Science  will  never  disturb  in  the  slightest  degree 
a single  one  of  the  great  moral,  religious  and  spiritual 
truths  taught  by  the  Bible,  nor  on  the  other  hand  can  the 
Bible  ever  become  a standard  by  which  to  judge  of  the  ac- 
curacy of  a single  scientific  conclusion.  Give  to  science, 
then,  the  largest  possible  liberty,  and  cling  to  your  Bible 
with  simple,  honest  faith  that  no  discoveries  in  the  realm 
of  material  things  can  repeal  one  of  its  authoritative  enact- 
ments relating  to  human  duty.  No  scientific  theory  or 
demonstration  can  ever  release  man  from  the  obligation 
to  love  God  with  all  his  might,  mind  and  strength,  and  his 
neighbor  as  himself. 


KCONOMY  ADVIBTISING  CO. 
PRINTERS  AND  BINDERS 
IOWA  CITY,  IOWA 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS-URBANA 


3 0112  027287546 


